Getting close to buying an OPPO 105 or 105D for BluRay Disk duties, and reading differences between the two... Other than the Darbee video processing, which I am not sure about, the 105D has slightly better support for DSD. I get that is a different stream format to PCM, but don't know whether it's something I should want, or will need. Seems the OPPOs only handle stereo DSD so can't see it being a decider either way.

What's the view on DSD - just another format war, or something to consider, but only if I have material & means to stream DSD to the OPPO? Feels like the real 'need' would only be for multi-channel, DSD-encoded files, but then the requirement would be to read from the library over the LAN, rather than stream via USB... Or am I more confused than I realise?

Never had this prob with LPs ;)

tokenbrit wrote:Getting close to buying an OPPO 105 or 105D for BluRay Disk duties, and reading differences between the two... Other than the Darbee video processing, which I am not sure about, the 105D has slightly better support for DSD. I get that is a different stream format to PCM, but don't know whether it's something I should want, or will need. Seems the OPPOs only handle stereo DSD so can't see it being a decider either way.

What's the view on DSD - just another format war, or something to consider, but only if I have material & means to stream DSD to the OPPO? Feels like the real 'need' would only be for multi-channel, DSD-encoded files, but then the requirement would be to read from the library over the LAN, rather than stream via USB... Or am I more confused than I realise?

Never had this prob with LPs ;)

DSD is something to consider, IMO it is the future of digital. The higher DSD rates like DSD128, DSD256 and DSD512 are combining the advantages of digital and analogue. There is a lot of discussion on the Computeraudiophile-Forum about the benefits of converting PCM and lower rate DSD to DSD128 or DSD256 by a software player in a computer. The final conversion from DSD to analogue is superior to a PCM to analogue conversion. I like DSD, PCM is like a dead horse for me.

KR

Matt

Where have you read that the two differ in their DSD capabilities?

Personally I would be only vaguely interested in DSD if I was into classical music. Pretty much all DSD content is derived from SACD material which has never had much more than a token presence for non-classical music.

Don't see it taking off.

CJ

I found comments that indicated 105 could only accept DSD from front USB-A, whereas 105D could read from either A or B - may have been early beta firmware. The question was really more about DSD than it was about the level of support in the different OPPOs.
Some say DSD is the next 'thing', others dismiss it, so looking for opinions here. Linn DSs don't support DSD, so was just wondering whether I should make it a factor or decision point in buying an OPPO.

DSD closely resembles the analogue waveform with a pattern of 1s and 0s in the digital domain. This is natural.
PCM imposes some sort of filter on the music: High volume signals are reproduced with high resolution and low volume signals are reproduced with low resolution. This is not natural.
Linn does not like DSD because the EXAKT-System is based on PCM 24/192. IMO, comparing the LP12 to a LINN DS the outcome has always shown the superiority of the LP12. I will not accept that the signals of my beloved LP12 are converted to PCM.
But: Although DSD is better than PCM, DSD on the Oppo will be inferior to PCM on a KLIMAX DS. It is a matter of the price.

KR

Matt

matthias wrote:DSD closely resembles the analogue waveform with a pattern of 1s and 0s in the digital domain. This is natural.
PCM imposes some sort of filter on the music: High volume signals are reproduced with high resolution and low volume signals are reproduced with low resolution. This is not natural.
Linn does not like DSD because the EXAKT-System is based on PCM 24/192. IMO, comparing the LP12 to a LINN DS the outcome has always shown the superiority of the LP12. I will not accept that the signals of my beloved LP12 are converted to PCM.
But: Although DSD is better than PCM, DSD on the Oppo will be inferior to PCM on a KLIMAX DS. It is a matter of the price.

KR

Matt

How did you come up with such a conclusion? I think it is possible to argue either way. In theory PCM offer a disturbance free frequency-amplitude space while DSD is compromised in amplitude, but relatively less compromised in frequency - so to speak. I think it is problematic to talk about amplitude and frequency as separate domains, as an error most often is present as an artefact in both time and amplitude.

As I see it DSD and PCM is just different coding techniques with slightly different pros and cons. It is very much possible to convert between the two in the digital domain (which direction that introduces the most signal deterioration depends on the content of the coded signal and the respective systems bandwidths.Both transitions can be made with very little deterioration on music signals). Which one that, at given time, are able to produce the best result probably depends more on what limitations is most problematic in the D/A conversion stage, at that time.

matthias wrote:DSD closely resembles the analogue waveform with a pattern of 1s and 0s in the digital domain. This is natural.
PCM imposes some sort of filter on the music: High volume signals are reproduced with high resolution and low volume signals are reproduced with low resolution. This is not natural.

Interesting thoughts, mattias. But although I intrigued by DSD, I am reluctant to pick sides (it really seems to have become pro or against) based on theory.

And "natural"? I don't get the resolution argument. In both DSD and PCM, low volume signals will have lower resolution that high volume signals. That's how it is in the digital world.

lejonklou wrote: Interesting thoughts, mattias. But although I intrigued by DSD, I am reluctant to pick sides (it really seems to have become pro or against) based on theory.

And "natural"? I don't get the resolution argument. In both DSD and PCM, low volume signals will have lower resolution that high volume signals. That's how it is in the digital world.

Fredrik,
take a digital volume control. It does work perfectly without attenuation, but if you go down to -60dB or lower it gets really worse. Now imagine a saxophone player, playing a jazz solo. In this piece of music you can have dynamics in the range of 60 dB. PCM recorded you have much less resolution in the quieter parts.
This is not the case for analog and AFAIK not for DSD, too. DSD has only 1bit, so the MSB and the LSB are the same.
I am not theory based, the proof of the pudding is listening and IMO here DSD wins, it is the most analog sounding digital recording technique.
There are interesting discussions about this topic at http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-da ... onversion/ with very good contributions of a poster named "Miska", the Finnish designer of a software player. He knows a lot about DSD.

Matt

Not posting this to take sides. I don't have the technical knowledge to decode arguments on either side.

There do seem to be some positive reviews for DSD, but also easy to find this from realhd-audo: "Using DSD 64/128 for production work is clearly not a viable option for high-end music and it is doubtful that moving forward with DSD for downloading will have any benefit for music lovers. In fact, it may just confuse things all the more"

I know I'm confused. Grateful if someone (Matthias?) could debunk or confirm the opinions (and details?) in the realhd-audio article.

tokenbrit wrote: There do seem to be some positive reviews for DSD, but also easy to find this from realhd-audo: "Using DSD 64/128 for production work is clearly not a viable option for high-end music and it is doubtful that moving forward with DSD for downloading will have any benefit for music lovers. In fact, it may just confuse things all the more"
I know I'm confused. Grateful if someone (Matthias?) could debunk or confirm the opinions (and details?) in the realhd-audio article.

There is an ongoing discussion with 62 pages about this topic on the CA-Forum:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-da ... tal-16093/

You have to know that both Waldrep and Siau are strong PCM proponents.
Have fun!

Matt

I skimmed pg.1 & pg.62 - the rest is too much for me. Thankfully, I found something useful on pg.62:

As someone who streams [Internet radio] and has a local [FLAC] library should I even be ensuring a new DAC has DSD?
If you're happy with [them] you are in good shape. But if you are looking for more, then DSD is something to consider.

That the OPPO has DSD is a bonus then. Format wars are a pain - no-one really 'wins'.

matthias wrote:This is not the case for analog and AFAIK not for DSD, too.

Oh yes, you have resolution problems with DSD. Some will say even bigger problems. Others say no, noise shaping takes us even lower than with PCM.

Again, this becomes a theoretical discussion. In practice, a lot of stuff happens when you play around with all the options for how to encode and decode. To the music! Unless the guys discussing these issues have access to DSD and PCM files made from the same analogue master and are into the Tune Method, I can't see that their arguments have any practical relevance.

My only personal listening experience with DSD is through SACD on the Unidisk 1.1/D. I tried around a dozen SACD's and not once did I feel they performed any better than the same recording on CD. Smoother and more boring. During the Unidisk days, Linn used to praise DSD. I never understood why.

Matthias, can you tell us more about how you do to enjoy DSD playback?

Which files, conversion (if any) and replay equipment?

lejonklou wrote:My only personal listening experience with DSD is through SACD on the Unidisk 1.1/D. I tried around a dozen SACD's and not once did I feel they performed any better than the same recording on CD. Smoother and more boring. During the Unidisk days, Linn used to praise DSD. I never understood why.

Yes, I had the same experience with SACD. But SACDs were compromised by the mechanics and DSD64. Now we have downloads up to DSD256. With DSD256 there no more issues regarding the "noise floor".

BTW, a Linn Forum contributor does DSD recordings from his LP12:

http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=28674

lejonklou wrote:Matthias, can you tell us more about how you do to enjoy DSD playback?

Which files, conversion (if any) and replay equipment?

Did you see this question of mine, Matthias?

I'm curious.

lejonklou wrote:

lejonklou wrote:Matthias, can you tell us more about how you do to enjoy DSD playback?

Which files, conversion (if any) and replay equipment?

Did you see this question of mine, Matthias?

I'm curious.

Yes, I try to write up some sort of a short manual for dsd playback tomorrow.

Matt

There is a lot of controversy over the DSD vs. PCM debate. I have not done any comparative listening so I cannot comment on the actual musical differences when using identical equipment. That said, the link I will post below purports to make such a comparison possible for those with the necessary equipment.

However, I did want to make a couple of comments and share some of what I have read. First off, the main reason we have DSD downloads becoming available is that Sony is trying to get some licensing money since the SACD failed to generate any significant amount. Second, there are very, very few pure DSD recordings as any editing requires converting the signal to PCM and back to DSD. Third, several of the manufacturers of high-end audio DACs have weighed in saying that DSD has at least as many problems as PCM and is no panacea. I am linking one such article which gives a reasonable historic and technical view of the debate from Ayre, a US manufacturer of high-end electronics including DACs that support DSD.

http://www.ayre.com/insights_dsdvspcm.htm

My own perspective is that it is the Hi-Fi press and a handful of manufacturers that are pushing the DSD format as the next big thing in order to sell more magazines and get a foothold in equipment sales. I have to say that consumer interest so far is pretty much nil as we have yet to sell a single DSD DAC nor have we had any serious requests from customers for one. I will also note that, while a couple of our manufacturers have stated they are working on making a DAC that supports DSD, none of them are enthused about the idea but they just feel the need to bend to the possible demand all the press focus might create. Whether any of this will create a real market is hard to judge but if I had to bet it would be that DSD will die a second death from general lack of public interest.

Finally, I think it is worth noting that the DACs in Linn Akurate and Klimax level streamers and DSMs have the ability to decode DSD if Linn chose to support it. Linn has chosen not to so far and they have posted a thread on their forum explaining why they feel DSD makes no sense in 2013. (I believe that would carry over to 2014 and 2105 as well.) Since Linn have in the past done a lot of SACD recordings it is a safe bet that they are quite familiar with the capabilities of the format. It should also be noted that the DACs in the Majik, Sneaky and Sekrit units do not have that capability so Linn's choice could also have to do with not wanting to support some formats on only half the line. Whatever the reasoning I am quite sure that if DSD ever does catch on in a big way Linn will come out with a software update to allow Akurate and Klimax units to support the format.

I don't know if any of this helps tokenbrit with his decision but I thought some additional information might be helpful to those wondering about the format.

Good post! The fact that editing requires DSD-recordings to be converted to PCM seem to be a closing argument against DSD. When the signal is PCM coded I see no reason for converting it to DSD.

ThomasOK wrote:There is a lot of controversy over the DSD vs. PCM debate. I have not done any comparative listening so I cannot comment on the actual musical differences when using identical equipment. That said, the link I will post below purports to make such a comparison possible for those with the necessary equipment.

However, I did want to make a couple of comments and share some of what I have read. First off, the main reason we have DSD downloads becoming available is that Sony is trying to get some licensing money since the SACD failed to generate any significant amount. Second, there are very, very few pure DSD recordings as any editing requires converting the signal to PCM and back to DSD. Third, several of the manufacturers of high-end audio DACs have weighed in saying that DSD has at least as many problems as PCM and is no panacea. I am linking one such article which gives a reasonable historic and technical view of the debate from Ayre, a US manufacturer of high-end electronics including DACs that support DSD.

http://www.ayre.com/insights_dsdvspcm.htm

My own perspective is that it is the Hi-Fi press and a handful of manufacturers that are pushing the DSD format as the next big thing in order to sell more magazines and get a foothold in equipment sales. I have to say that consumer interest so far is pretty much nil as we have yet to sell a single DSD DAC nor have we had any serious requests from customers for one. I will also note that, while a couple of our manufacturers have stated they are working on making a DAC that supports DSD, none of them are enthused about the idea but they just feel the need to bend to the possible demand all the press focus might create. Whether any of this will create a real market is hard to judge but if I had to bet it would be that DSD will die a second death from general lack of public interest.

Finally, I think it is worth noting that the DACs in Linn Akurate and Klimax level streamers and DSMs have the ability to decode DSD if Linn chose to support it. Linn has chosen not to so far and they have posted a thread on their forum explaining why they feel DSD makes no sense in 2013. (I believe that would carry over to 2014 and 2105 as well.) Since Linn have in the past done a lot of SACD recordings it is a safe bet that they are quite familiar with the capabilities of the format. It should also be noted that the DACs in the Majik, Sneaky and Sekrit units do not have that capability so Linn's choice could also have to do with not wanting to support some formats on only half the line. Whatever the reasoning I am quite sure that if DSD ever does catch on in a big way Linn will come out with a software update to allow Akurate and Klimax units to support the format.

I don't know if any of this helps tokenbrit with his decision but I thought some additional information might be helpful to those wondering about the format.

hcl wrote:The fact that editing requires DSD-recordings to be converted to PCM seem to be a closing argument against DSD. When the signal is PCM coded I see no reason for converting it to DSD.

You can do editing and mixing in the analog domain and convert then to DSD without any PCM conversion.
Many recording studios do analog mixing and convert to PCM as final step.

99% of all Analog-Digital-Converter-Chips and Digital-Analog-Converter-Chips are SDM(DSD) based. That means in the ADC the analog signal is converted to SDM and then in an additional step to PCM.
In the DAC PCM is converted back to SDM and from SDM to Analog.
With DSD you get rid of the two additional steps.

Matt

ThomasOK wrote: I am linking one such article which gives a reasonable historic and technical view of the debate from Ayre, a US manufacturer of high-end electronics including DACs that support DSD.

Thomas,
Charles Hansen of Ayre is a strong PCM proponent. With the two other PCM proponents presented here we have seen so far only one side of the coin. You can easily pick some DSD proponents, who show us the other side.

Matt

Some interesting stuff to read:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-ge ... tal-18636/

KR

Matt

matthias wrote:

lejonklou wrote:

lejonklou wrote:Matthias, can you tell us more about how you do to enjoy DSD playback?
Which files, conversion (if any) and replay equipment?

Did you see this question of mine, Matthias?
I'm curious.

Yes, I try to write up some sort of a short manual for dsd playback tomorrow.
Matt

Anyone interested in DSD playback and have some questions please send me a PM.
Thanks

KR

Matt

matthias wrote:Anyone interested in DSD playback and have some questions please send me a PM.
Thanks

KR

Matt

As already mentioned, I'm interested.

But why only pm? Why not post your recommendations here?

ThomasOK wrote:Whatever the reasoning I am quite sure that if DSD ever does catch on in a big way Linn will come out with a software update to allow Akurate and Klimax units to support the format.

I don't know if any of this helps tokenbrit with his decision but I thought some additional information might be helpful to those wondering about the format.

Yes, that helps - thank you, Tom. Good to know that Akurate & Klimax level DSs can do DSD, should there be the demand...

matthias wrote:Anyone interested in DSD playback and have some questions please send me a PM.
Thanks

KR

Matt

I'm curious Matt. Given that OPPO can, and Linn could, then that is all the hardware I need, but always interested in others' music system experiences, including yours with DSD rather than discussion that are more intellectually in favour of one format vs. another

Fredrik and tokenbrit,

last year I suggested at the Linn forum that Linn should develop a Klimas DS with DSD capability. There was an open hostility to a "Klimax DSD". The heated debate is an interesting read:

http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread. ... hlight=dsd

Yes, Linn could do it, but they do not want to. They would create an in-house competition against their PCM based Exakt-System and this is not desirable for Linn. Now we have the situation that major PCM based manufacturers fight against DSD. It is the fight of Goliath against David.

But what do we need for the best DSD playback in 2014?

1.) A computer with a lot of processing power
2.) A high quality audio player
3.) A DAC with DSD128 or higher capability

Modern DACs employ oversampling and delta-sigma modulation, but are more or less resource constrained. Higher quality oversampling and delta-sigma modulation can be done by utilizing vast mount of processing power available in modern computers.
That means the "compromised" DAC-Chip should be used only for the conversion from DSD128 or higher to analog, the rest is done by an upsampling high quality audio player in the computer.
IMO, the best audio player is:

http://www.signalyst.com/consumer.html

(Disclaimer: I have no affiliation of any form with any manufacturer)

To be quite clear all your files (16/44,1, 24/96, 24/192, DSD64) are to be converted by the audio player to the highest DSD rate your DAC is providing. The minimum should be DSD128, better is DSD256 or DSD512.
You need for this conversion a computer with a lot of processing power:
A Quad Core, i7 with 16GB RAM is recommended.

Some DACs have a built-in preamp with digital and/or analog attenuation. If you want to enjoy the highest quality do not use this preamp but connect the output to a preamp like Sagatun or Sagatun Mono.

Some music:

https://www.nativedsd.com
http://shop.dsdfile.com ( a swedish label!)

I hope this helps

Thank you

ATB

Matt